Search form

Eight years ago we set out to improve Michigan through unbiased, nonprofit journalism. We are still here and still adding reporters thanks in large part to our members. If you appreciate our nonpartisan approach, please become a Bridge Club member. We have five members-only events this fall around the state, including a MSU vs. Michigan football tailgate in Ann Arbor on November 16. Join us!

Democratic Attorney General Dana Nessel and the Michigan Supreme Court are mulling whether to weigh in with opinions addressing two unresolved questions — whether the laws themselves are legal, and whether the Legislature can, under the state constitution, adopt citizen-initiated legislation and later change it during the same legislative term, as the Republican-majority Legislature did with both laws last year.

Neither Nessel’s office nor the court has said when it will decide whether to release an opinion. But legislators from both parties, who requested the opinions, and employer groups have asked for clarity on the issue sooner rather than later.

“We are telling (our members) there are these two pending decisions and that we’ll communicate as soon as we learn anything different,” said Wendy Block, vice president of business advocacy for the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, which supports the Legislature’s last-minute changes to both laws in December’s lame-duck session.

“Right now, everybody’s kind of holding their breath waiting to see what might happen in the next few days. No matter what, something’s going to go into effect on Friday.”

Two ballot committees, Michigan One Fair Wage and MI Time to Care, last summer earned enough signatures from registered Michigan voters to get their proposals to raise the state’s minimum wage and require paid sick leave, respectively, onto the November 2018 ballot.

Then, in a contentious lame-duck move, they weakened the strongest provisions before the two-year legislative term ended in December. In signing the bills, Snyder said he believed the original citizen-drafted laws would have been a roadblock in Michigan’s ongoing economic recovery.

Now, Michigan’s minimum wage now will not reach $12 (actually, $12.05) until 2030, eight years later than the original timetable. And employers will be required to offer 40 hours of sick leave, instead of 72. Businesses with fewer than 50 employees will be exempt from the sick leave law under the lame-duck changes. The Legislature also kept a lower minimum wage for employees who receive tips as part of their job, such as restaurant servers. One Fair Wage’s proposal would have phased that distinction out until all minimum-wage workers earned the same hourly rate.

Republican legislators have said they are confident their lame-duck maneuvering is on solid legal ground, and in February asked the Michigan Supreme Court to issue an advisory opinion to resolve the remaining uncertainty. Business groups say the laws as originally written would have been onerous and made compliance difficult.

Backers of the ballot initiatives and Democratic lawmakers, meanwhile, say the Legislature’s revisions circumvented the will of hundreds of thousands of Michigan voters who wanted the chance to vote on the more-generous minimum wage and sick leave proposals as written. State Sen. Stephanie Chang, D-Detroit, asked Nessel’s office to issue an opinion on the constitutionality of the Legislature’s actions, while the committee behind the paid sick leave drive has signaled it may try again for the November 2020 ballot.

“I would like whatever (option) means that we could have democracy upheld, and the will of the people,” said Danielle Atkinson, co-chairwoman of the MI Time to Care ballot committee, who added she was pleased Nessel’s office has said it would review Chang’s opinion request.

As for 2020, Atkinson said: “We are prepared to go back and hit the streets and talk to people if we don’t get what we need, either way.”

Alicia Renee Farris, state director of the Restaurant Opportunities Center of Michigan and chair of the Michigan One Fair Wage steering committee, said in a statement that “gutting the One Fair Wage proposal during lame duck was blatantly unconstitutional, tramples the democratic process and undermines the rule of law. We are hopeful the Michigan Supreme Court will stand with Michigan workers and the more than 400,000 Michigan voters who signed the One Fair Wage petition and approved raising the minimum wage to $12 for all Michigan workers.”

Legal questions unsettled

Nessel’s opinion, if she issues one, would follow contradictory opinions from two past attorneys general on the Legislature’s ability to adopt and later revise citizen initiatives.

Kelly Rossman-McKinney, a spokeswoman for Nessel, told Bridge that an opinion is not expected before the law takes effect this week. The request is still under review, she said, and the attorney general is waiting to see if the Supreme Court will weigh in.

“As such, this status is akin to pending litigation — and the AG has traditionally refrained from opining on matters that are the subject of pending litigation,” Rossman-McKinney said in a statement.

It’s unclear whether the state Supreme Court will even issue an opinion. A rarely used provision of the Michigan constitution allows the legislature and governor to ask the state’s high court for an opinion on whether a law that has been enacted is constitutional, before it takes effect.

The Supreme Court can choose not to issue such an opinion. In at least the last decade, more requests for Supreme Court advisory opinions were rejected than granted, court spokesman John Nevin told Bridge last month.

The last time the court granted a request was eight years ago, in response to Snyder’s inquiry about the constitutionality of a new tax on some retirement income.

“There’s a lot of hesitation about whether to do it, to issue an advisory opinion, and most often when they’re asked, they decide not to,” said Richard Friedman, a law professor at the University of Michigan Law School, who said he has not followed the minimum wage and sick leave issue. “It’s not in the ordinary litigation process and it’s not what courts are used to doing.”

Past Supreme Court opinions have noted that its advisory opinions don’t set precedent the same way as an opinion issued through the traditional litigation process, according to opinions cited by Nevin, the court spokesman. It’s possible the minimum wage and paid sick leave laws could wind up challenged in court, particularly if the Supreme Court decides not to write an advisory opinion.

Michigan’s high court will hear oral arguments Wednesday on whether Republican efforts to pass the ballot measure, then gut it, violated the constitution. That does not mean the court will decide the matter, at least right now.

Does Michigan’s constitution allow the legislature to adopt and amend citizen initiatives in the same two-year term, or does it explicitly prohibit the practice? It’s now up to the state’s highest court to decide.

Michigan senators approved major changes to two citizen-backed laws that would increase worker pay and benefits, hours after presenting the changes to the public. Critics say the move leaves the public in the dark.

Like what you’re reading in Bridge? Please consider a donation to support our work!

We are a nonprofit Michigan news site focused on issues that impact all citizens. In an era of click bait and biased news, we focus on taking the time to learn both sides of a story before we post it. Bridge stories are always free, but our work costs money. If our journalism helps you understand and love Michigan more, please consider supporting our work. It takes just a moment to donate here.

Which is exactly why I refuse to go through the self checkout at grocery stores. I don’t work for the grocery store and I’m not about to take someone’s job by using one of those things. Change is not a bad thing either, we are suppose to evolve and change as time goes by. Adapt to different environments. If that is the change you see, I’m sure other opportunities will arise that will give society what it needs.

Good thinking! I'm always amazed when I frequently visit Oregon ( a true lefty paradise!) and their law outlawing self service gas pumps. I've been told it preserves those much sought after pump attendant jobs. Maybe Michigan with our new Gov can do one better and outlaw people mowing their own lawns creating new jobs and reducing environmental damages?

The Michigan GOP is pretty obvious about who they favor: the wealthy, the corporations with their willingness to gut anything and everything that might, just might, help out the Michigan middle class.
Then again who contributes the most 'campaign contributions' to the GOP? Bingo.
Votes don't matter - campaign contributions (aka legal bribes) do - until we decide enough is enough and vote with our interests.

Why do employers still get to pay wait staff less than $3.50 per hour? Just remember if you make $10.00 perhour that is $20,000 per year. Live in many of our cities and you can not survive unless you hold down two jobs. R.L>

At what point did Republicans totally abandon their long held view that constitutions, laws and the will of the people should be sacrosanct . The citizens of Michigan spoke loud and clear on both of these issues and yet the Republican legislature found it okay to overrule the will of the people in the dark of the night in a lame duck session. Can you imagine the hue and cry from Republicans and the Chamber of Commerce if a citizen initiative was passed that cut business taxes but a Democratic legislature decided to reduce the tax cut.

You are very much mixing things up. The US Constitution isn't really that into going with the straight out "will of the people". The founders were well aware of the proclivity of "the people" to give away and receive stuff at the expense of someone else. So they did things to filter it through it through elected leaders hoping for a little more educated opinion. Writers of Michigan's constitution weren't quite so wise.